本研究進行電塔基礎之縮尺設計，設計鋼筋混凝土梁試驗在不同鋼筋配置及剪力跨度的情況下，受到單向加載時梁之性能及破壞模式，不同鋼筋配置包含端部的傳統彎鉤或擴頭鋼筋以及中央的搭接或續接。根據ACI 318-19及土木401-110之規定，設計了六座簡支梁及六座懸臂梁進行試驗，續接器則分為同位續接及錯位續接，並且都滿足SA級續接之性能。
　　簡支梁採用四點抗彎試驗，剪力跨度分別為2、4、6，結果顯示在採用擴頭及續接器的試體中也會受到剪力跨度的影響產生不同的破壞形式，而擴頭的表現上與傳統標準彎鉤錨定性能相當，中央採用續接或是搭接時也都可以大於設計之標稱強度約30%-80%，顯示續接器及擴頭鋼筋在不同剪力跨度下是可行的。
　　懸臂梁採用三點抗彎試驗，剪力跨度約為1.3，結果顯示傳統彎鉤與擴頭鋼筋均可以有效發揮錨定強度，而在整體曲線行為上，不論是何種端部配置及中央配置，都能發揮出近似的性能，且都大於設計之標稱強度30%，說明了續接是可行的之外，也證明了同位續接與錯位續接可以發揮如同搭接的性能。
　　根據實驗上的證據，說明擴頭鋼筋及續接器在單向加載之下，可以發揮出良好性能，於工程實務上也可以提供更多元之選項，增加現場施工的方便性與安全性之外，在經濟上也更具有經濟效益。

In this study, there will do the experiment of reinforced concrete beams which is scale model from electric tower foundation. Concrete beams subjected to monotonic lateral pushing under different steel bar configurations and shear spans to know the performance and failure mode. Different bar configurations include standard hooks or T-headed steel bars on both side and lap splice or coupler in the center. According to the regulations of ACI 318-19 and civil engineering 401-108, six simply supported beams and six cantilever beams were designed for testing. In addition, the coupler are divided into co-located and dis-located and satisfy SA-class coupler.
The simply supported beams adopts a four-point bending test and shear span ratio are 2, 4, 6, respectively. The results show that the specimens which use T-headed bar and coupler will be different failure mode in different shear span. The anchoring performance of T-headed bar is similar to standard hook, and the performance of lap splice and coupler are greater than designed strength about 30% to 80%. It shows that lap splice and coupler are feasible under different shear spans.
The cantilever beam adopts a three-point bending test and shear span ratio is about 1.3. It shows both standard hook and T-headed bar can effectively perform good anchoring strength. In the overall, the curve behavior of all specimens show similar performance and they are all greater than designed strength about 30%. It can also be proved that the ability of co-located and dis-located coupler are equal to the lap splice or even more.
According to the experimental evidence, the T-headed bar and coupler can perform good under monotonic lateral push. It provides a multiple choice in practice and promotes the constructability, safety and economy in the site.

【1】 ACI Committee. (2007). Types of Mechanical Splices for Reinforcing Bars (ACI
439.3R-07). American
【2】 ACI Committee, & International Organization for Standardization. (2019).
Building code requirements for structural concrete (ACI 318-19) and commentary.
American Concrete Institute.
【3】 American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE). (2000). FEMA 356 Prestandard and
commentary for the seismic rehabilitation of building. Rehabilitation, 221.
【4】 Bompa, D. V., & Elghazouli, A. Y. (2019). Inelastic cyclic behaviour of RC
members incorporating threaded reinforcement couplers. Engineering
Structures, 180, 468-483.
【5】 Chidambaram, R. S., & Agarwal, P. (2018). Performance evaluation of innovative
hybrid rebar coupler in reinforced concrete beams subjected to monotonic
loading. Structural Concrete, 19(3), 892-903.
【6】 Ghali, A., & Gayed, R. B. (2012). Bundling of headed bars in concrete. Canadian
Journal of Civil Engineering, 39(7), 849-853.
【7】 Kang, T. H. K., Kim, W., & Shin, M. (2012). Cyclic testing for seismic design
guide of beam-column joints with closely spaced headed bars. Journal of
Earthquake Engineering, 16(2), 211-230.
【8】 Lee, H. J.; and Yu, S. Y., 2009, “Cyclic Response of Exterior Beam-Column Joints
with Different Anchorage Methods,” ACI Structural Journal, Vol. 106, No. 3, May-
June, pp. 329-339.
【9】 Ou, Y. C., Canseco, H. A, and Kurniawan, D. P., 2017, “The Anchorage
Performance of Headed Deformed Bars in Exterior Beam-Column Joints Under
Cyclic Loading,” KSCE Journal of Civil Engineering, Vol. 21, No.7, Nov., pp.
2837–2849.
【10】Paknejadi, A. H., & Behfarnia, K. (2020). Performance of reinforced self-
consolidating concrete beam-column joints with headed bars subjected to pseudo-
static cyclic loading. Ain Shams Engineering Journal.

【11】Phuong, N. D., & Mutsuyoshi, H. (2015). Experimental Study on Performance of
Mechanical Splices in Reinforced Concrete Beams. ACI Structural Journal, 112(6).
【12】Pekelnicky, R., Engineers, S. D., Chris Poland, S. E., & Engineers, N. D. (2012).
ASCE 41-13: Seismic evaluation and retrofit rehabilitation of existing
buildings. Proceedings of the SEAOC.
【13】Shao, Y.; Darwin, D.; O’Reilly, M.; Lequesne, R. D.; Ghimire, K.; and Hano, M.,
2016, “Anchorage of Conventional and High-Strength Headed Reinforcing Bars,”
SM Report No. 117, University of Kansas Center for Research, Lawrence, KS,
Aug., 234 pp. https://kuscholarworks.ku.edu/handle/1808/21738
【14】Yang, J. M., Lee, J. H., Yoon, Y. S., Cook, W. D., & Mitchell, D. (2012). Influence
of steel fibers and headed bars on the serviceability of high-strength concrete
corbels. Journal of Structural Engineering, 138(1), 123-129.
【15】中華民國國家標準. (2015). CNS 15560鋼筋機械式續接試驗法
【16】中國土木水利工程學會 混凝土工程委員會. (2019). 混凝土工程設計規範與
解說(土木401-100).
【17】中國土木水利工程學會 混凝土工程委員會. (2019). 混凝土工程設計規範與
解說(土木401-108).
【18】中國土木水利工程學會 混凝土工程委員會. (2021). 混凝土工程設計規範與解
說(土木401-110)
【19】中華民國 內政部營建署(2002), 結構混凝土施工規範
【20】公共工程委員會. (2016). 施工綱要規範, 03210章 鋼筋, V4.0 Aug.
【21】石橋忠良, 鈴木基行, 下村匠, 内田裕市, 桜井順, 大谷恭弘, & 鈴木昭信.
(2007). 土木学会 「鉄筋定着・継手指針 [2007 年版]」 の概要. コンクリ
ート工学, 45(12), 8-16.
【22】李宏仁. (2017). 建築工程鋼筋機械式續接性能基準及驗證研究. 內政部建築
研究所委託研究報告
【23】李崇琦. (2018). 混凝土結構鋼筋機械式續接性能合格標準之實驗研究. 國立
雲林科技大學營建工程系營建工程組碩士論文
【24】林克強. (2014). 擴頭鋼筋於樑柱接頭之設計與研究. 土木水利 Vol 41, No.2
P62~P75
【25】邱聰智，鍾立來，涂耀賢，賴昱志，曾建創，翁樸文，莊明介，葉勇凱，李
其行，林敏郎，王佳憲，沈文成，蕭輔沛，薛強，黃世建 (2020) 台灣結構
耐震評估與補強技術手冊 (TEASPA V4.0)，NCREE-20-005
【26】紀凱甯. (2010). 高強度混凝土之 T 頭鋼筋錨定行為研究.淡江大學土木工程
學系碩士班學位論文, 1-424.
【27】陳正平 (2019). 機械式鋼筋續接器之檢驗方法介紹. 台灣省土木技師公會技
師報第1151期.
【28】張國忠. (2015). 混凝土結構鋼筋續接器研究與應用探討. 朝陽科技大學營建
工程系碩士論文